Charted Space Capital Warships are under gunned.

[swordtart]

Robots are also limited to their programming. You can’t talk a robot through shutting down a fusion power plant that’s going critical you can at least attempt to with a living crew member.

That is only true of robots with Primitive Brains. Robots with even Basic brains have an INT stat. They may not be very good at interpreting instructions and have very little initiative, but they are just as capable as a sophont of following instructions even if they have no software covering that skill, see Basic(Labourer). In the worst case you can use Remote Operations with them. In dangerous environments they might be better than a sophont as they will not be distracted by (or might be immune to) the danger.

It seems that someone of INT 4 has a 21/36 (just under 60%) chance of getting into the Navy and 26/36 (over 70%) or greater chance of survival even in Engineering, if they were a Liney it would be over 80%. So a Basic brain robot might not even be the dumbest person on the ship (and smarter people might be too valuable to risk).

Once you get to Advanced brains they are just as capable of using skills they don't have (at the usual -3 for being untrained) and even learning new skills (RH p66). To be clear that is learning not merely having extra software packages installed (though that is certainly a possibility). The total skills they can have is limited but they can be talked through a process just as well as any sophont with the same INT level.

Also while they are not illegal in the Charted space setting there is a bias against using military robots in the third imperium.

Maybe, but even in Chartered space the TI opinion is not shared by all polities.

In general I’m not a big fan of turning CS into Star Wars light. While I do use robots in my charted space universe they tend to be purpose built and kept under human supervision, for example a robotic fork left for loading and unloading cargo ships. And the military is even more bias if not phobic about using robots. The reasons given are fairly simple which would you rather have targeting something with nuclear missiles rather it’s true or not people trust the human operator over a machine.

That is your prerogative, but you will get less pushback if you don't phrase things as absolutes. IMTU or "I think" would separate preference of what rules you choose to follow from the RAW.

My experience with real world weapon systems is that whilst we talk about the man-in-the-loop most of the systems are now so complex and the decision making time so compressed that in reality the only decision made by the operator is whether to arm the system or not. All target acquisition and identification is done automatically. Cued targets are presented to the operator if they are initiating attack, but self-defence systems just don't have the luxury of time. You set your parameters and hope you got them right. Some nations are more fastidious in establishing tight controls than others and some get more blue-on-blue or "collateral damage" than others.

In my opinion, lining up the enemy over iron sights is very much a ground pounder phenomenon but in todays video game wars the ground pounder is starting to get very vulnerable. If the TI Navy insists on fighting with one hand tied behind its back then I can't see how it hopes to survive in a complex congested battlespace. We simulate the ship to ship combat in 6 minute rounds, but the time to target is far less than that generally and your point defence gets fractions of a second to respond once missiles are in range. Gunners for those systems at least are simply setting presets once missiles are detected in-bound, no-one is directly aiming a laser counter-battery. Firing a laser at another ship is just target selection.

 

[Condottiere]

You can compartmentalize.

Each robot can only carry out a specific function, and in the case of gunnery, a human can only pull the trigger.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Robots are also limited to their programming. You can’t talk a robot through shutting down a fusion power plant that’s going critical you can at least attempt to with a living crew member. Also while they are not illegal in the Charted space setting there is a bias against using military robots in the third imperium.

In general I’m not a big fan of turning CS into Star Wars light. While I do use robots in my charted space universe they tend to be purpose built and kept under human supervision, for example a robotic fork left for loading and unloading cargo ships. And the military is even more bias if not phobic about using robots. The reasons given are fairly simple which would you rather have targeting something with nuclear missiles rather it’s true or not people trust the human operator over a machine.

Very Advanced or better could manage.

 

[swordtart]

Very Advanced or better could manage.

Very Advanced could conduct the work unsupervised (and probably would be able to warn you that the malfunction needed intervention). The use case was talking an unskilled crew member though the activity. For that only a Basic brain is required. For example the Basic(Labourer) brain has broad construction skills and you can tell it to build a room, you don't have to programme it like a 3d printer.

"Open that panel, cut the blue wire, reroute the red wire into the secondary power converter... ok, that is the section top left with all the screw terminals... Ok now undo the third screw from the left, strip the 1" of insulation off the unconnected end of the red cable and fit into the screw connector you just undid."

Neither the robot nor the crewmember is using any skills here they are just blindly following instructions and asking for clarification when they don't understand. It will be the person talking them through it that needs to make a skill check (probably with a negative DM for doing it remotely).

RH p65 gives us "A brain is what makes a robot something more than a mobile machine or drone. It provides purpose to the robot’s actions. The distinction between a drone and a robot is a robot’s lack of an external operator. A drone may have some autonomous functions but without external input, it cannot devise or revise its tasks. A robot, once instructed to perform an activity, does so autonomously and reacts to changing conditions. A vehicle autopilot is not generally considered a robot, as the ability to perform mobility tasks is considered a base function of a moveable machine and does not allow the vehicle to perform any other tasks besides navigating its environment, a task so innate to a robot that it is considered a trait, not a skill. Robots have skills beyond the ability to traverse their environment."

So if you talk any robot with any brain through a set of motions with it's manipulators it is capable of conducting that activity. That is absolutely within the scope of any Basic brain robot and I would say as even Primitive brains can process commands, they too can operate by direct instruction - however with INT 1 they might require more frequent clarification than a Basic Brain.

However normally you would just use the drone interface by default and control it directly via Remote Operations.

 

[MarcusIII]

I strive for a consistent world/universe. There should be reasons for the way things are the way they are. For instance, there are computers with programs that are capable of piloting and putting a ship into Jump. Why not unmanned Jump ships? There is no tech reason. So
I decided the reason had to societal in some way. Atone point in the past there were unmanned jump ships, (passengers & cargo only for instance). But accidents happen and there was no one to hold criminally responsible when warranted, which caused public outcry after a while. In the largest polity laws were eventually passed making corporate officers criminally liable if no ship crew and officers. Well, THAT put an end to crew-less ships real fast... Thaat forced smaller governments to fall into line because of trade...

 

[tytalan]

Maybe, but even in Chartered space the TI opinion is not shared by all polities.

“None of the Imperium’s armed forces use lethal robots in the field. Although smart missiles and autonomous defence systems are widespread, the use of warbots or other directly lethal war machines is contrary to doctrine. Robots are mostly used in support roles such as logistics and construction.” Pg 4 RH. I would argue ships crew is very much directly part of a lethal war machine. Ship yards yes warship as crew no. Aslan will not use Warbots because of their honer system. Yes there are some polities that will and do use robots in a combat role.

 

[tytalan]

I strive for a consistent world/universe. There should be reasons for the way things are the way they are. For instance, there are computers with programs that are capable of piloting and putting a ship into Jump. Why not unmanned Jump ships? There is no tech reason. So
I decided the reason had to societal in some way. Atone point in the past there were unmanned jump ships, (passengers & cargo only for instance). But accidents happen and there was no one to hold criminally responsible when warranted, which caused public outcry after a while. In the largest polity laws were eventually passed making corporate officers criminally liable if no ship crew and officers. Well, THAT put an end to crew-less ships real fast... Thaat forced smaller governments to fall into line because of trade...

The tech reason is that for some reason a ship without any biological sentient beings aboard is vastly more likely to miss jump also a jump course plotted by a computer/robot with out biological oversight is also likely to cause a miss jump. It supposedly has to do with the nature of jump space and quantum observation.

 

[MarcusIII]

The tech reason is that for some reason a ship without any biological sentient beings aboard is vastly more likely to miss jump also a jump course plotted by a computer/robot with out biological oversight is also likely to cause a miss jump. It supposedly has to do with the nature of jump space and quantum observation.

That's not a tech reason as there is no science behind it. Computers generate plots already and are just used by the navigator. The universe cannot know if a biological entity punched the keypad. This is the type of arbitrary rule that I avoid to have a consistent universe.

 

[tytalan]

That's not a tech reason as there is no science behind it. Computers generate plots already and are just used by the navigator. The universe cannot know if a biological entity punched the keypad. This is the type of arbitrary rule that I avoid to have a consistent universe.

We are talking about something there is no scientific support for so yes it is a tech answer for this piece of sci-fi technology that uses concepts we do have any support for

 

[Endie]

That's not a tech reason as there is no science behind it. Computers generate plots already and are just used by the navigator. The universe cannot know if a biological entity punched the keypad. This is the type of arbitrary rule that I avoid to have a consistent universe.

There's no more science behind it than there is, for example, behind your own belief that one can watch dogfights, on Youtube, between the USAF and space aliens.

It's a game. And one of the long-standing elements of that game's fiction (note: fiction) is that you need a sophont in the loop for reliable astrogation. One point of which is pretty much so that there's a reason to still have travellers on a ship, thus making the game of Traveller feasible within its own universe.

 

[MarcusIII]

We are talking about something there is no scientific support for so yes it is a tech answer for this piece of sci-fi technology

Nope. Because we already know that the universe doesn't watch to see if a button is pushed by an inanimate object or a biological one. That is SETTLED science. The button is pushed in real space not jump space.

 

[Endie]

Nope. Because we already know that the universe doesn't watch to see if a button is pushed by an inanimate object or a biological one. That is SETTLED science. The button is pushed in real space not jump space.

You signed up for these forums four and a half days ago and I've yet to see anyone post so many unsupported and incorrect assumptions so quickly. And not just on conspiracy theories about aliens on youtube.

He's telling you the canon version. You are at total liberty to say "IMTU that's not true" but you can't just assert that he's wrong, because he's right.

 

[tytalan]

Nope. Because we already know that the universe doesn't watch to see if a button is pushed by an inanimate object or a biological one. That is SETTLED science. The button is pushed in real space not jump space.

But the ship travels through jump space which apparently needs a biological mind on the ship and apparently there are nuances in piloting a jump course that require a biological mind to notice. You’re assuming that the problem is in normal space when the lore says it’s not. So yes this is sci-fi and a Sci-Fi justification is totally acceptable

 

[MarcusIII]

But the ship travels through jump space which apparently needs a biological mind on the ship and apparently there are nuances in piloting a jump course that require a biological mind to notice. You’re assuming that the problem is in normal space when the lore says it’s not. So yes this is sci-fi and a Sci-Fi justification is totally acceptable

There is nothing in the rules about this. If your crew dies while in jump the ship comes out of jump as normal per the rules. So you are incorrect.

 

[Endie]

But the ship travels through jump space which apparently needs a biological mind on the ship and apparently there are nuances in piloting a jump course that require a biological mind to notice. You’re assuming that the problem is in normal space when the lore says it’s not. So yes this is sci-fi and a Sci-Fi justification is totally acceptable

You're arguing with a literal conspiracy theorist. You can't persuade him with rational argument because he is fundamentally far beyond the reach of rationality, and will never come back.

 

[tytalan]

There is nothing in the rules about this. If your crew dies while in jump the ship comes out of jump as normal per the rules. So you are incorrect.

Actually there is stuff in the rules for this. AoCS2 “ Auto-Plotted Jumps For unknown reasons, automated jumps are prone to an increased risk of misjump. A jump plotted by the automatic systems without the involvement of a sentient astrogator is subject to the same DM-4 as all other fully automated actions. For this reason, if just one skilled crewmembers is carried it is usually an astrogator. A jump plotted in semi-automatic mode by someone without the Astrogator skill but with a basic understanding of the concepts involved suffers DM-2. It is thought that a machine will produce several apparently equal solutions to the same jump plot and cannot distinguish between them but a sentient mind somehow ‘feels’ which one is slightly better than the others. Even someone who is not a trained astrogator can do this to some extent and if one is available they can oversee the plot. Their Astrogator skill applies in this case and the DM-2 is not suffered. Attempting to send a ship through jumpspace without people on board enormously increases the risk of misjump, for reasons unknown. In addition to the DM-4 for the autoplot, a vessel suffers an additional DM-4 if there are no conscious minds aboard. Low-berth passengers are by definition not conscious and experiments with highly intelligent but non-sentient minds have produced wildly differing results.” Pg 236-237. It’s actually stated elsewhere but Aliens of Charted Space 2 happens to be the book I remember the pages for.

So this is supported by the rules with given reasons

 

[Endie]

It's also in High Guard. It says the computer can help but the astrogator needs to perform several functions, and it goes on to say that it's an art, not a science, meaning that most species don't even try to automate it in the first place. AoCS2 explains why and what happens when they try.

 

[swordtart]

“None of the Imperium’s armed forces use lethal robots in the field. Although smart missiles and autonomous defence systems are widespread, the use of warbots or other directly lethal war machines is contrary to doctrine. Robots are mostly used in support roles such as logistics and construction.” Pg 4 RH. I would argue ships crew is very much directly part of a lethal war machine. Ship yards yes warship as crew no.

So the TI has a policy that applies to all aspects of the Imperium armed forces. I didn't argue against that.

Aslan will not use Warbots because of their honer system.

Except "Females use robots as expert assistants, sometimes supplanting the female role in small ihatei scout ships and battlefield support technician tasks." RH p189. By your expansive defintions above that would count as a warbot.

Yes there are some polities that will and do use robots in a combat role.

So long story short, you agree with "Maybe, but even in Chartered space the TI opinion is not shared by all polities."

 

[swordtart]

Actually there is stuff in the rules for this. AoCS2 “ Auto-Plotted Jumps For unknown reasons, automated jumps are prone to an increased risk of misjump. A jump plotted by the automatic systems without the involvement of a sentient astrogator is subject to the same DM-4 as all other fully automated actions. For this reason, if just one skilled crewmembers is carried it is usually an astrogator. A jump plotted in semi-automatic mode by someone without the Astrogator skill but with a basic understanding of the concepts involved suffers DM-2. It is thought that a machine will produce several apparently equal solutions to the same jump plot and cannot distinguish between them but a sentient mind somehow ‘feels’ which one is slightly better than the others. Even someone who is not a trained astrogator can do this to some extent and if one is available they can oversee the plot. Their Astrogator skill applies in this case and the DM-2 is not suffered. Attempting to send a ship through jumpspace without people on board enormously increases the risk of misjump, for reasons unknown. In addition to the DM-4 for the autoplot, a vessel suffers an additional DM-4 if there are no conscious minds aboard. Low-berth passengers are by definition not conscious and experiments with highly intelligent but non-sentient minds have produced wildly differing results.” Pg 236-237. It’s actually stated elsewhere but Aliens of Charted Space 2 happens to be the book I remember the pages for.

So this is supported by the rules with given reasons

Robot Handbook p103. (and if anything is canon about robots, it should be the Robot Handbook)
"
ASTROGATION SKILL LIMITATION
In the Charted Space universe, sentient Astrogators perform jump calculations with much lower risk of misjump than a nonsentient mind. Only a fully Conscious machine, either running Conscious Intelligence on a ship’s core computer or a Conscious ship’s brain can avoid this limitation; even a Self-Aware robot brain lacks the ‘spark’ necessary.
All jumps plotted by a non-sentient mind suffer DM-4. A review of jump solutions by even an unskilled individual with the background and basic knowledge to understand the results of the calculation, such as someone with Pilot, Navigation or applicable Science skill, can reduce this to DM-2.
Also, ships jumping without conscious sentient minds aboard suffer an additional DM-4 on the chance of misjump. If all conscious minds are inactive, for example in hibernation or controlled using a RIBACI, this DM still applies."

So according to that wording jumping without conscious sentient minds (in the chartered space universe) results in significantly increased chance of misjump. It does not follow that when you are already in jump space if those conditions change then the jump will then fail (as you already made the engineering check for the jump at the point you pushed the jump button).
So not all Traveller is Chartered Space. Signficant increase is not the same as guaranteed misjump. And the DM can only apply to a check you are making and you make that check before you are in jump space.

So whilst I don't agree with the argument put forward by MarcusIII about it not being real science and I fully agree that canon fiction outranks real world science in that game of science fiction (and everything outranks real world pseudo-science) and I disagree that "There is nothing in the rules about this." I tend to agree with the latter part of the sentence that "If your crew dies while in jump the ship comes out of jump as normal per the rules."

Ending any statement of opinion with a blunt "So you are incorrect." is impolite.

 

[tytalan]

So long story short, you agree with "Maybe, but even in Chartered space the TI opinion is not shared by all polities."

Which is a far cry from your let’s replace everyone with a Robot. Also the discussion was about TI military ships and the fact that the low ranking crew should not be in staterooms but instead in barracks.